Gawker
Aww, our adorable li'l sister site Jezebel is almost a year old and is being celebrated with its very own Times feature. Yay! "Like a digital-age upgrade of Sassy, the 1990s-era indie-feminist teenage magazine, Jezebel appeals to a young, urban demographic, with a roster of editors whose strong voices inspire loyal followings. Ms. [Tracie 'Slut Machine'] Egan shares details of her intimate life that are not safe for work. Maureen Tkacik, the site’s features editor, who is known as Moe, gravitates toward politics and speaks out against what she calls the 'idiocracy.' Dodai Stewart, the senior editor, pokes fun at magazines and catalogs; in a feature called LOLVogue, she writes satirical captions for fashion spreads." And then come the commenters...
"Jezebel’s readers—they often call themselves 'Jezzies' or 'Jezebelles'—are permitted to post to the site after a first prospective comment is approved by a Gawker Media staffer, and must adhere to some basic rules: be witty and relevant, no whining and don’t attack people." But you know how those crazy commenters are!
Still, such attacks—on one another, and on the editors—happen regularly. When Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton won the New Hampshire primary after getting teary-eyed at a campaign event, Ms. Tkacik fired off a furious rant, accusing women of voting with their emotions. One commenter, a 28-year-old Brooklyn medical biller who uses the screen name SinisterRouge, wrote back: "Seriously, Moe, I know you love Obama. But to say women just up and voted for her because she cries is retarded."
As part of a popular feature called Snap Judgment, readers offered biting comments on everything from Ms. Jolie’s eye-popping neckline to her possible state of mind.
Then a commenter with the screen name Calraigh wrote that, despite being pregnant, Ms. Jolie looked like “an Ethiopian famine victim.” Within minutes, a half-dozen angry readers had made their own snap judgments of Calraigh:
“You’re gross.”
“Are you serious?”
“That comment is inappropriate. I don’t know what website you think you are on, but that is not how we roll.” [NYT]
Comments
ha! I think they captured the spirit of Jezebel comments. Those few quotes spoke volumes.
Liked the magazine awards piece Moe wrote. But when I go over there I never speak.
Jezebel can be a hostile environment to comment in. Any comment that goes against what may be the mainstream over there can result in a onslaught of unpleasantries directed at you. I am happy to see the Judge Judy posts though. My bread and butter are Gawker and Consumerist.
@belltolls: @BalknChain: I enjoy a lot of the posts there, but Gordon Bennett, commenting there is like jumping into a estrogen fueled moshpit.
I love Sinister Rouge. I just do. And I don't agree that there is any enforced view-point over there: those women are brutal to each other! In fact, I find Wonkette to be much, much more homogeneous in terms of group think.. That site is a fucking frat house.
@BalknChain: Agreed -- If you're dumb enough to post something insulting, obnoxious, or obviously misogynist. Otherwise it's no different than any other site dedicated to a particular area of interest.
@NefariousNewt: Agreed entirely. I think it's a pretty safe place to comment, actually.
@UnstableMabel: well, we can't have cotton candy scented pillow fights in our frilly underwear all the time you know.
Does Jack Ketch have a sister? They could use her help.
@ThaKadinskyPapers: Hey! Wait a minute! There are cotton candy scented pillow fights in frilly underwear? How did I miss those?
Yeah, that's all good and well, but where's my drunken Battlestar Gallactica recap???
@NefariousNewt: You have to squint your right eye and hop on your left foot while watching Pot Psychology in order to see them.
The part about the "old-guard" on a blog less than a year old is just stupid. For crying out loud, you're a commenter--are people taking themselves this seriously?
@Helman: I lurve SinisterRouge too. She smart and knows what she's talking about. And yep - the differing viewpoints are welcomed there.
@ThaKadinskyPapers: We're still on for tonight, though, right?
@hamburgerhotdog: Just send him on over. I've been stockpiling rotten vegetables, and my throwin' arm's getting itchy.
@hamburgerhotdog: Here, here! They need to cull some commenters over there.
@Helman: They can be brutal but I think it's mostly impatience with folks who jump in that don't 'get it'.
I like the 'mosh pit' comment above, that kind of applies as well. Because if you can't hang in the pit you'd better just watch from the back, baby!
@hamburgerhotdog: And ridiculous. Jezebel is a far more welcome site for commenters than some others.
@bigleggedwoman: Or people on those political posts who represent rumors out there about Obama or HRC as fact. Nothing gets SinRoo & others more fired up that that.
@BowlingForDollars: And after that article, we're probably going to see an influx of new people. Nothing wrong with that since I think Jezebel deserves the attention, but Hortense is going to have her hands full for a while!
@hamburgerhotdog: Jack Ketch's sister drowned in a vat of 9,000 page emails and 18,000 private messages after attempting to execute 5 people.
@Helman: Honestly, many of our posts that turn ugly are cross-posted. Every site has its own sensibility. Sometimes the mix works, and sometimes it explodes and becomes a big bloody mess.
That was a great article. I love reading the posts but the comments are too hard to wade through. It's a freaking echo chamber. There seems to be some policing so maybe I will crank up my Blood Sugar Sex Magik
Cd and jump into the mosh pit.
On second thought I will wait until they eradicate all comments that contain the word totes.
@LipstickLibrarian: absolutely. you bring the glitter oil and i'll bring the unicorn musk.
@hamburgerhotdog:
I think the "old guard" label came from the author of the piece, not from any commenter. Now the whole, folks who privately refer to themselves as "cool kids" . . .
@hamburgerhotdog: I believe Ms. Brewer is referring to the "Old Guard" as the sharp, snarky commenters who've been around since the early days of Jezebel, as opposed to the newer commenters, many of whom are dense, dull, and sorely lacking a sense of humor.
@Claire Standish:
I totes agree.
Personally, I sometimes wonder at the hypocrisy and the flagrant promotion of substance abuse over there. Enough to give me pause. But not enough for me to enjoy certain articles.
@nowimpissed: I will be reading that post on Monday for sure. The whole cool kids thing is going to cause alot of fights and "I told you so's".
@nowimpissed: AAAARGH!
@hortense: I'm sorry, sweetie. I wish you had a bigger, sharper scythe--a pink one with a laser beam on the bottom and GPS and shit.
@nowimpissed: I have heard people refer to themselves as such.
@pureblarney: yeah, a free sample or something would help huh?
@LipstickLibrarian: Agreed. This is normal. There are always people who are the first to get in on the ground floor, who establish the ground rules, then sit back and watch more people come in, "mucking up the place." Even so, Jezebel is fairly tame compared to some places...
@hamburgerhotdog: I'm thinking I'll go all Agatha Christie and bring back the arsenic. Keep it classy.
@marin79: Well, it's not like she has anything else to do, right Hortense?
@nowimpissed: Unfortunately, I think the "cool kids" thing came from a sarcastic facebook group - it was a joke & not serious at all - anyone is allowed to join. Clearly just didn't translate that way to the NY Times author (understandable, I suppose).
@Claire Standish: its going to be a clusterfuck and i. cannot. wait.
@hortense: Please tell me that you will adopt Jack's policy and execute at will.
@ineffable.me: I do love a good bloody battle. I think I will come out to play.
@marin79: And I doubt it would be different on any other site. Politics is not a fit subject for public discussion most of the time.
The nicest people were at Gridskipper but the Lifehacker poeple will reem you for not knowing F key commands.
@NefariousNewt: But most people at Jez who decide to participate on those political posts usually do so at their own risk. They get heated like any conversation on politics can, but most of the Obama & HRC supporters get along in general. Even thought it wouldn't seem like that for people who aren't CH regulars, etc.
@Claire Standish: I've actually banned quite a few people. We just don't do execution posts, so it isn't as obvious that people are going. And we have a ton of commenters, and many new ones appearing on the site everyday, so there is a bit of a hydra effect going on.
@hortense: I have read some of the comments lately since you have been moderating, great job. I just thought weekly public executions would be fun and also cause some of the dead weight to go into convulsions, cry and never return. But that's just me, I'm a tad twisted.
But more important and relevant than anything actually written in the piece... how do you ladies think you photographed? And can we get a "Snap Judgment" on the above photo? Yes please!
@Claire Standish: hello, twisted, nice to meet you!
At least Jezebel commenters don't incessantly kneejerk "I will never be commenting here again!" every few days and then return later in the same thread.
Or maybe they do. I can never make it far enough into the comments to notice.
@marin79: I think that's where people get this idea that Jezebel is so commenter unfriendly. They see these heated arguments and don't get that they're just discussions, not knock-down-drag-out fights. Everybody is usually back on good terms by the next Snap Judgement.
@belltolls: Kindness is inefficient.
I honestly like Jezebel, somewhat in spite of myself. I do feel like I learn things about the way women think that I wouldn't learn otherwise.
Also I feel like I'm growing a set of ovaries, with just 20 minutes' exposure per week.
I rarely venture over to Jez - I have to admit I enjoyed the "Pap Psychology" thread, mostly because I adore gynecologist horror stories, but I'd never dare to chime in with my own.
@ThaKadinskyPapers: Why hello. I have seen your delicious bitchiness before. Very nice.
@Claire Standish: The whole execution idea is really unnecessary. I for one appreciate it the targets are simply banned and I don't have to know about it. Hortense does an excellent job.
@Phyllis Nefler: And resistance is futile.
@NefariousNewt: Did you miss the twisted part? She is doing a great job.
I have to say I quit Jezebel. Fan of the concept, not of the extremely personal attacks that can go on in the comments. Also, a little too much hypocritical attitude from commenters and editors (I remember one slightly asinine but hardly vicious dissenter got a public/front page "shut the fuck up"). My biggest peeve was the unedited, massively stoned IM conversation posts. I know I'm not the only one who found them more than a little self-indulgent and boring, but folks who brought that up in the comments were subsequently mauled.
And comments of that ilk, at minimum, got an "If you don't like it here then leave," which I did.
@hortense: I think I need to loan you my bush hog and let you mow down about half of the dipshits.
@NefariousNewt: @Claire Standish: Ah thanks, I'm trying. And I think due to the fact that the last time Jezebel did public executions it got so ugly and dramatic in the comments that it's probably better to be stealth about banning people, but that's just me.
@Claire Standish: Come over to my sandbox we can be twisted together.